User talk:Northamerica1000
 | This user is busy, and a timely response may not occur at times.
|
 | This user prefers to communicate on-wiki, rather than by email. |
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130 Threads older than 20 days are typically archived. Some may be archived sooner.
|
-
Ham, cheese, eggs, lemons and a cat with a captured mouse. Oil on canvas from the 1700s by George Smith of Chichester (1714–1776) -
This week's article for improvement (week 45, 2017)
 "Pay no more than Ceiling Prices", WWII U.S. poster
The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection: Please be bold and help to improve this article! Previous selections: Choreography • Little John Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:06, 6 November 2017 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • |
|---|
Deletion of an active AfD by Nom
Northamerica1000, User:TheGracefulSlick started Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/June 2017 Brussels attack two days ago. A number of editors had weighed in, most opining Keep. (As is frequently the case on AfDs regarding terrorist attack, Graceful Slick and I disagreed). Nevertheless, I was shocked when she suddenly closed the AfD with the comment: "The result was Unfortunately, all this AFD has accomplished is attract WP:SYNTH. I think it is best to close this instead in hopes of ending the degrading of an already newsy article. Nomination withdrawn." I advised her to restore the AfD. [1]. She erased my comment from her talk page. What is the proper procedure in such a case?E.M.Gregory (talk) 01:21, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
- As I stated, the discussion and the article were derailed by the arrival of synthed material. The same editor consistently adds material that misrepresents the sources in the midst of AFDs. Therefore, I saw the AFD as detrimental to whatever material left that could actually be salvaged if there was a merge or redirect (editing history would still exist). I wanted to address the synthed material and I am sure Pincrete -- the only other editor to !vote delete at the time -- will not mind; in fact, he may even thank me for closing the discussion before more misrepresented content was included in the article as he usually is the one tasked with cleaning it up.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 01:29, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
- @E.M.Gregory and TheGracefulSlick: Since TheGracefulSlick initiated the discussion, and a delete !vote exists in the discussion, it should have been closed by an uninvolved user, and allowed to run for the full standard seven days before closure. Also, in the close, TheGracefulSlick stated that the nomination was withdrawn, but the outstanding delete !vote inhibits closing the discussion as withdrawn, although it is okay to withdraw in a comment. North America1000 06:28, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
- I'll keep that in mind from now on. Thanks. I believed the synth needed to be immediately addressed before the fate of the article could be ruled upon. I probably should have foreseen such issues to arise during the AFD so I will be more cautious in a similar situation.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 08:30, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
- @E.M.Gregory and TheGracefulSlick: Since TheGracefulSlick initiated the discussion, and a delete !vote exists in the discussion, it should have been closed by an uninvolved user, and allowed to run for the full standard seven days before closure. Also, in the close, TheGracefulSlick stated that the nomination was withdrawn, but the outstanding delete !vote inhibits closing the discussion as withdrawn, although it is okay to withdraw in a comment. North America1000 06:28, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent changes
- You will no longer see the patrol log on Special:Log unless you specifically select it. [2]
Changes later this week
- The 2017 Community Wishlist Survey begins on 6 November. You can post proposals from 19:00 UTC and until November 19.
The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 7 November. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 8 November. It will be on all wikis from 9 November (calendar).
Meetings
You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 8 November at 16:00 (UTC). See how to join.
Future changes
- URLs that link to sections on Wikimedia wikis with non-Latin scripts have looked like this:
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Википедия#.D0.98.D1.81.D1.82.D0.BE.D1.80.D0.B8.D1.8Finstead ofhttps://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Википедия#История. This will soon be fixed. Old links will still work. [3][4]
Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
18:45, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
- Hi Northamerica1000. Apologies that I recently removed two unused citations from the article To'ak Chocolate. The unused citations had caused cite errors, but with hindsight they should not have been removed. The content was not promotional and in my view this is a completely valid article. Regards, Kind Tennis Fan (talk) 01:22, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
G13 Eligibility Notice
The following pages will become eligible for CSD:G13 shortly.
Thanks, HasteurBot (talk) 03:00, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
Would you mind my putting in a suggst for you to consider on this one? Since this was closed with no consensus and had no relists that letting this run for a week or so longer might have been applicable given that the regulars had weighed in and the coast was therefore clear for uninvolved users to opine and thus obtain consensus? I'm happy to leave this to you to decide, but just wanted to offer some food for thought. I have no plans for a DRV if you disagree. Thanks. Spartaz Humbug! 08:11, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
- @Spartaz: I don't know. The discussion received ample input, particularly per today's rates of participation at AfD, and there really is no consensus in the discussion. If I were to reopen per this request, I could receive some flak from the community, essentially for reopening per a request from the op that may be hoping for more delete !votes to occur (no offense intended toward you, this is just how others could perceive this). That all said, it is a classic case of the SNG vs GNG, and WP:PORNSTAR does not state that such subjects are presumed notable, as exists on others, such as WP:NOLYMPICS. Let me know what you think about all of this. North America1000 10:59, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
- Personally, I think that [[5]] makes it clear that keep arguments based on technical pornbio passes get much less weight if the article fails gng. On that basis, the invalid keep votes here should get less weight and the discussion was tending to delete. I personally feel allowing more time to discuss and possibly find sources ( or most likely not) is better than a redo in 4 weeks. YMMV. I respect your decision either way. Spartaz Humbug! 17:51, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
- @Spartaz: Thanks for the reply, and upon further consideration, I have reopened and relisted the discussion. North America1000 13:17, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks very much :-) Spartaz Humbug! 21:03, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
- @Spartaz: Thanks for the reply, and upon further consideration, I have reopened and relisted the discussion. North America1000 13:17, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
- Personally, I think that [[5]] makes it clear that keep arguments based on technical pornbio passes get much less weight if the article fails gng. On that basis, the invalid keep votes here should get less weight and the discussion was tending to delete. I personally feel allowing more time to discuss and possibly find sources ( or most likely not) is better than a redo in 4 weeks. YMMV. I respect your decision either way. Spartaz Humbug! 17:51, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
Article creation request
Hi sir I request you for an article creation please sir. You can create Suman Gupta article I am this but an editor can delete that article you want any others information about Suman Gupta please search by Google and see this Wikipedia:Suman Gupta (Actress) Thank you sir and please created it. Article Creator Editor (talk) 11:27, 10 November 2017 (UTC)